Aussie Government Keen To Yank Content From Google Groups

Google has just released its biannual figures on what content government bodies asked it to remove in the first six months of 2010. The biggest surprise? Just how many items on Google Groups were removed at the request of the Australian government.

Compared to the last six months of 2009, things haven't changed that much in terms of the number of requests (17 this time, 14 last time), but Google complied with a lot more of them (almost 93% this time versus just over 50% last time). Whether that means the government got better at knowing what to ask for, or Google just felt like being nice/compliant, is anybody's guess. In any event, we get a lot more detail this time around, with information on exactly how many sites, YouTube clips and other sources were impacted.

Comments

I think it all depends on the content. If someone said 'the Prime Minister is an idiot,' then that is no reason to ask for it to be removed, but if it was a video on how to make a bomb then I can understand why it was removed.

the only people that get to complain were those that didn't for the ranga and her party ... I would put money on it that this wouldn't have happened under a liberal government ... no internet filters ..

sure u can have your wonderful NBN ... but what are you going to do with the bandwidth when you have nothing to access?! Im sure that Norsefire and it's fingermen will be here soon aswell ...

As unpleasant as it is as a concept, filter isn't law yet -- the existing laws which allow content to be blocked (and make requests like this more likely to be granted) were passed by the Liberals when they were in power. So not much of an argument really (and you would lose your money).

James, what about chemistry text books? They tell you exactly what chemicals react violently with other chemicals and many of these are found in common household items? Do we pull all of these too because someone could construct an explosive device or primitive chemical weapon? Your post shows the ignorance around censorship and the many misguided aims of it.

Yes Minister is not a documentary series. I presume that you were making a joke, or typed the wrong thing occidentally, but just to clarify, its a scripted TV series. Quite a funny one which perhaps highlights some important issues, but not a doco.

The government is well within its right to ask Google to take down things, as is anyone, just as Google has every right to refuse. Most of it would usually need some justification for Google to comply.

It is interesting to see what has been asked. Brazil only got 70% of requests complied with, and they seemed to have a few obscure ones.

I'd be interested to know what the gmail ones concerned - short of an account owned by a terrorist group I can't see what could be taken down, or what a government could have access too.

While the removal stats are interesting, the really worrying part is the 'data' requests that they don't break down any further. that's 200 separate users or occasions where the government demands details 'about a user or service' from google.

They also don't tell us how many of those requests were complied with. I'm guessing the numbers aren't good.

Taken from the Government Requests FAQ (http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/faq.html#governmentrequestsfaq)

"What do the numbers represent?

These numbers represent the requests we received from government entities for the removal of content or the disclosure of user data in six-month blocks. There are limits to what this data can tell us. There may be multiple requests that ask for the removal of the same piece of content, or data for the same account. Because of the complexity of these requests, the numbers we are sharing do not reflect the total number of accounts subject to data disclosure requests by governmental agencies. Also, this report doesn’t indicate whether Google complied with or challenged any request for user information, although we do provide percentages about our compliance with requests to remove content. We hope to provide more detail about our compliance with user data requests in a useful way in the future."

Only logged in users may vote for comments!

Get Permalink

Trending Stories Right Now

Yesterdays' announcement of the new Samsung Galaxy Fold might not have been as well executed as a famous Steve Jobs reveal but it was every bit as revolutionary. In the same way the iPhone and iPad completely changed what we expected from mobile devices, the Samsung Fold is poised to change the tech world. But while the hardware looks incredible, it's the software I want to focus on. In that brief glimpse, we saw how far iOS has fallen behind Android.

You've now had 24 hours to digest the Samsung Galaxy S10 smartphone and its bevy of game-changing features. If you've decided this phone is for you, pre-ordering from Samsung direct is a pretty smart option. But what if you can't afford to buy one outright?